Rioting, looting reported in Ferguson (Missouri)

originally posted by: mikeone718

originally posted by: yuppa

WHO WANT US ALL TO KEEP THINKING LIKE WE ARE ALL SEPERATE RACES WHEN ITS NOT SCIENTIFICALLY TRUE.There is ONE RACE and thats HOMO SAPIENS.

You can keep thinking that, but the race that live near me work and pay taxes.
The race that are under constant police watch (because of their great contributions to society) will make you want to sell your house (if you own one) if they started moving in.

Reducing a fellow human being to a sterotype is wrong. Scientifically its wrong to keep llabeling others as races. God created all of us and we are to love each other like brothers and sisters. Just because your area is that way does not ring true for every area. And really the police watch everybody.

What is needed is people being taught were all the same no matter skin tone and melanin content. Thats where the powers that be keep their power. In keeping us all suspicious of one another just for a skin tone diffrence.

originally posted by: Thefarmer
What part do you not get no matter how we protest peaceful or by rioting there is no imidiate change like with civil rights that took years

If you actually bothered to read what I wrote I said that societal change does not take place immediately.

The second part of your sentence is contradictory as 'imidiate change...that took years' makes absolutely no sense. Was it immediate or did it take years?

Wow

a reply to: thesaneone

That's interesting in direct contradiction to what other witnesses are saying. Seems there should be video from inside the car or at least audio all car are equipped with it now days. this is disturbing..."He further said the medical examiner would issue a ruling on how many times Brown was shot, but “it was more than just a couple.”"

originally posted by: LDragonFire
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Did they destroy the city of Yorktown when Cornwallis surrendered?

Nope.

a reply to: LDragonFire

The Boston Tea Party was non-violent,

"Boston‘s embattled Royal Governor had an inspiration. He reasoned that if the ships couldn’t leave the harbor, eventually they would have to be unloaded, making the tea tax immediately due and payable. Thus, in late November 1773, he instructed his military commanders to keep the British ships in port, using force if necessary.

For weeks the hulking ships fueled Boston’s colonists’ seething anger. After constant, intense discussions at daily meetings attended at first by hundreds — and soon by thousands — a decision was reached on December 16: To make a clear-cut statement by boarding the three ships and tossing the tea overboard, thus ensuring that no tax could ever be paid on any of it. Approximately 120 colonists took immediate action, rowed out to the ships and boarded.

British crews attested that other than hoisting the tea overboard, there were no acts of destruction. Indeed, the protesters even swept the ship decks clean afterwards. The Massachusetts Gazette reported that a broken padlock, the personal property of one of the ships’ captains, was replaced."

I paved the way for a violent succession and revolt.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
You support the colonists looting and rioting British merchant ships, Red Coat munitions and supply's. Look up the New York massacre when British troops opened fire on rioting colonists.

What is the difference? One was fighting against injustice, and the other group was also fighting against injustice the only difference is the color of there skin.

Wanna go back to the fall of the Roman Empire for examples of rioting?

Edit to add I meant Boston massacre.

Zero of those examples had to do with looting your neighbor or burning his house down. They attacked those who were persecuting them--the British, not they guy next door.

In the lawlessness you are defending, they were not attacking those who were "persecuting" them, they were attacking and destroying people in the same boat as them. They were not "fighting injustice" they were taking advantage of the chaos to steal from and hurt their fellow man, not the enemy.

originally posted by: beezzer
To compare opportunistic thugs to anyone who actually marched for freedom insults everyone who ever marched for freedom.

This. Dr. King would be ashamed at the mental gymnastics used to justify criminal acts in this thread.

a reply to: LDragonFire

Actually it was 50 years ago exactly.....Civil Rights Act of 64

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Comedy =/= news.

Why should a law abiding individual in a free society have to justify owning anything? You feel the need to justify what books you own? You think you should ask the state for permission to own them? Would you be upset if people tried to take your books away from you?

Unfortunately, today's politics in states are real comedy... very ineffective bunch of comedians... new about it, no matter how serious can't be very different - just look at fox news...

Are you seriously comparing guns with books? What about nukes? Should we all have them? According to you, we should.

At least it is very easy to count NRA members that are here on ATS - just check how many stars you and other NRA supporters get... funny...

originally posted by: ParanoidAmerican
a reply to: LDragonFire

Actually it was 50 years ago exactly.....Civil Rights Act of 64

Don't tell him that African Americans were voting and holding office in the US long before the civil rights act...it would make his head explode.

1870 was the first AA congressman.
en.wikipedia.org... States_Representatives

originally posted by: SuperFrog

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Comedy =/= news.

Why should a law abiding individual in a free society have to justify owning anything? You feel the need to justify what books you own? You think you should ask the state for permission to own them? Would you be upset if people tried to take your books away from you?

Unfortunately, today's politics in states are real comedy... very ineffective bunch of comedians... new about it, no matter how serious can't be very different - just look at fox news...

Are you seriously comparing guns with books? What about nukes? Should we all have them? According to you, we should.

At least it is very easy to count NRA members that are here on ATS - just check how many stars you and other NRA supporters get... funny...

You don't think that books can be dangerous?

I didn't say anything about nukes. Nice try at diversion and reducto ad absurdum.

Since we are playing the usual "disagree with me you must be a shill" game, how much does HCI pay you? (Nothing I bet, but I hope you can see how stupid that line of comment is.)

a reply to: NavyDoc

I think the first woman we elected 1916......lol wow women get the shaft...


oops just noticed the pun....

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Holy crap! Sixteen? I wish I knew at sixteen what you obviously
know. This is an excellent place for you to be then. Creative
screen name and all. Had to get some sleep.

Boston Bread Riot:

The Boston Bread Riot was the last of a series of three riots by the poor of Boston, Massachusetts, between 1710 and 1713, in response to food shortages and high bread prices. The riot ended with minimal casualties.

In the early 18th century, the city of Boston had very little arable land, and most grain had to be imported from surrounding areas or from abroad. It was common practice for the larger local grain merchants to hoard grain to drive up local prices, and to sell local grain in more lucrative foreign markets such as Europe or the sugar plantations of the West Indies. On top of this, Queen Anne's War (1702–1713) interfered with foreign trade. By 1709, Boston was experiencing a serious food shortage and skyrocketing bread prices.

The hardest hit were the working poor. Since they did not own land, and were therefore not allowed to vote, governmental indifference to their needs left violence as the only effective recourse. A percentage of the poor began an uprising against the government.

In April 1710, a group of men broke the rudder of a cargo ship belonging to merchant Andrew Belcher, to stop its cargo of wheat from being shipped away and sold abroad. The next day, about 50 men attempted to force the ship's captain ashore, intending to loot the ship of its grain. They were arrested, but popular support for their cause resulted in them being released without charges.

In October 1711, a fire in Boston left over 100 families homeless, leading to a second riot.

In May 1713, a mob of more than 200 rioted on Boston Common, protesting high bread prices. As well as attacking Belcher's ships, the mob "broke into his warehouses looking for corn, and shot the lieutenant governor when he tried to interfere.

link

Adams contended that the colonists had to oppose British tyranny dramatically—even with violence. He and members of the “Loyal Nine,” a secret group of Boston radicals, welded together a corps of husky South Boston “bully boys” to perform some of the more unsavory revolutionary tasks, including intimidating tax collectors and threatening British officials. Mob violence had always plagued Boston, but now the rioters attained a political role, which brought with it a certain revolutionary legitimacy.

A patriots history

originally posted by: NavyDoc
You don't think that books can be dangerous?

I didn't say anything about nukes. Nice try at diversion and reducto ad absurdum.

Since we are playing the usual "disagree with me you must be a shill" game, how much does HCI pay you? (Nothing I bet, but I hope you can see how stupid that line of comment is.)

Doc, are you loosing your argument in absurdity after comparing books with guns and then crying that I am doing the same with nukes?!

Come on, if your example with books is not clear example of reductio ad absurdum, what is. And yes, that just makes you hypocrite...

BTW, not in any groups, what about you? Are you NRA member, and if yes, are you being paid for what you doing here?

If you are not, your loss, you should be, even you doing not so good job of it.

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Boston Bread Riot:

The Boston Bread Riot was the last of a series of three riots by the poor of Boston, Massachusetts, between 1710 and 1713, in response to food shortages and high bread prices. The riot ended with minimal casualties.

In the early 18th century, the city of Boston had very little arable land, and most grain had to be imported from surrounding areas or from abroad. It was common practice for the larger local grain merchants to hoard grain to drive up local prices, and to sell local grain in more lucrative foreign markets such as Europe or the sugar plantations of the West Indies. On top of this, Queen Anne's War (1702–1713) interfered with foreign trade. By 1709, Boston was experiencing a serious food shortage and skyrocketing bread prices.

The hardest hit were the working poor. Since they did not own land, and were therefore not allowed to vote, governmental indifference to their needs left violence as the only effective recourse. A percentage of the poor began an uprising against the government.

In April 1710, a group of men broke the rudder of a cargo ship belonging to merchant Andrew Belcher, to stop its cargo of wheat from being shipped away and sold abroad. The next day, about 50 men attempted to force the ship's captain ashore, intending to loot the ship of its grain. They were arrested, but popular support for their cause resulted in them being released without charges.

In October 1711, a fire in Boston left over 100 families homeless, leading to a second riot.

In May 1713, a mob of more than 200 rioted on Boston Common, protesting high bread prices. As well as attacking Belcher's ships, the mob "broke into his warehouses looking for corn, and shot the lieutenant governor when he tried to interfere.

link

Adams contended that the colonists had to oppose British tyranny dramatically—even with violence. He and members of the “Loyal Nine,” a secret group of Boston radicals, welded together a corps of husky South Boston “bully boys” to perform some of the more unsavory revolutionary tasks, including intimidating tax collectors and threatening British officials. Mob violence had always plagued Boston, but now the rioters attained a political role, which brought with it a certain revolutionary legitimacy.

A patriots history

A riot 60 years before the American Revolution? LOL. Not connected to the independence movement and they still didn't burn up or steal from their neighbors.

originally posted by: SuperFrog

originally posted by: NavyDoc
You don't think that books can be dangerous?

I didn't say anything about nukes. Nice try at diversion and reducto ad absurdum.

Since we are playing the usual "disagree with me you must be a shill" game, how much does HCI pay you? (Nothing I bet, but I hope you can see how stupid that line of comment is.)

Doc, are you loosing your argument in absurdity after comparing books with guns and then crying that I am doing the same with nukes?!

Come on, if your example with books is not clear example of reductio ad absurdum, what is. And yes, that just makes you hypocrite...

BTW, not in any groups, who about you? Are you NRA member, and if yes, are you being paid for what you doing here?

If you not, your loss, you should be, even you doing not so good job of it.

Not at all. Books have been banned by governments quite often for the same exact reasons: too dangerous for the common people to have. History--you should learn some.

a reply to: NavyDoc

The Boston Tea Party (initially referred to by John Adams as "the Destruction of the Tea in Boston"[2]) was a political protest by the Sons of Liberty in Boston, on December 16, 1773. The demonstrators, some disguised as American Indians, destroyed an entire shipment of tea sent by the East India Company, in defiance of the Tea Act of May 10, 1773. They boarded the ships and threw the chests of tea into Boston Harbor, ruining the tea. The British government responded harshly and the episode escalated into the American Revolution

non violent?

Rioting is a part of our history. Some you support but if there black they are thugs and criminals?

originally posted by: WeRpeons
None of this would have happened if this teen wouldn't have been confrontational with the police. I'm not condoning the police shooting this kid multiple times and taking his life, but I question this teen's upbringing. I would think any law abiding citizen wouldn't aggravate a situation with police. We all know police have the authority to throw our butts in jail, they're armed, and if they feel pressure or disrespected, they can easily over react. I sure wasn't raised to be confrontational with people in authority, and I surely would never have tried to argue with the police. Even if this teen thought the police were wrong, there are other avenues to take to lodge a complaint. It's why we have lawyers and civil liberty organizations.

You were raised a sheep. This is America, land of equal opportunities, but you're saying here that cops, no matter what, are above the rest of us. No thanks...I say challenge them at all costs when you feel unjustly treated and disrespected. Respect goes both ways. So, if a cop just rolls up on you when you're simply walking down the street and asks what you're doing or where you're going, you should bow down to their greatness and answer obediently...when it's none of their damn business! I was raised to stand up for myself and in doing so, two times in my younger years I was charged with this little made up law known as "Obstruction of Justice" and I beat the case in court both times.

In your first statement, you question this kids upbringing. He graduated high school a couple of months ago and was starting college next week. How's that for an upbringing?

You also say that people have other avenues for their complaints. Maybe in your world, but most people can't afford lawyers and "stuff" to right their injustices. Just the way it is.